Overview of February results for the two Southern California ports

The Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach each released February cargo data showing mostly positive movement in container volumes, with differences in monthly and year-to-date trends across import, export and empty container categories.

Port of Los Angeles February totals and historical context

The Port of Los Angeles recorded total February volume of 824,323 TEU (Twenty‑Foot Equivalent Units), a 3% increase from the same month a year earlier and 11% above the port’s five‑year February average. That total represents the second‑largest February throughput in the port’s history, exceeded only by the pandemic‑era surge in February 2022.

Port of Los Angeles cargo mix and year‑to‑date figure

POLA’s February breakdown and year‑to‑date figure were reported as follows:

• Imports: 433,812 TEU, up 5% year‑over‑year
• Exports: 116,633 TEU, up 7% year‑over‑year
• Empty containers: 273,878 TEU, down 2% year‑over‑year
• Through the first two months of 2026, total POLA volume: 1,636,324 TEU, reported as up 5% year‑to‑date

POLA executive commentary on flows and seasonal effects

POLA Executive Director Gene Seroka attributed part of February’s import strength to the annual pull‑forward before the Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in Asia, when importers bring in extra cargo. He described the export figure as an improvement from recent lows, while noting substantial work remains to rebuild U.S. agricultural and manufacturing exports.

Seroka also said February’s level of empty boxes matches current demand patterns as carriers reposition equipment back to Asia during the traditional slack season. On a recent POLA media call he summarized the opening two months of the year by saying the port had handled about 1.6 million TEU and described cargo movement as steady.

He further characterized that performance in two ways: while the port is slightly ahead of its five‑year average, he said the start of this year was 5% lower than last year’s elevated beginning, which was driven by pre‑tariff shipments. Looking ahead, he said he expects a March dip in volumes followed by a stronger April as retailers begin replenishment and spring/summer fashion shipments return to the docks. Seroka also noted that despite trade policy shifts and events in the Middle East, the first two months have been relatively predictable and the port is positioned with efficient operations, ample capacity and a capable workforce.

Port of Long Beach February totals and year‑to‑date update

The Port of Long Beach reported total February volume of 767,525 TEU, a 0.3% increase over February of the prior year. On a year‑to‑date basis through February, POLB’s total volume was 1,615,290 TEU, a 6% decrease compared with the same period last year.

Port of Long Beach cargo composition for February

POLB’s February category results were detailed as follows:

• Imports: 368,060 TEU, down 0.2% year‑over‑year
• Exports: 97,422 TEU, up 8.2% year‑over‑year
• Empty containers: 302,044 TEU, down 0.15% year‑over‑year

POLB leadership perspective on operations amid uncertainty

Port of Long Beach CEO Dr. Noel Hacegaba said cargo volumes remained positive in February despite growing uncertainty tied to the conflict in the Middle East. He told reporters that shipments continue to move smoothly, planned sailings remain on schedule, and the port has acted as a reliable harbor amid trade and geopolitical uncertainty.

Hacegaba added that the conflict has injected additional uncertainty into global trade and has prompted broad market reactions across the supply chain, but emphasized that cargo movement at Long Beach remains fluid.

Administration announces temporary waiver

The White House announced a temporary suspension of the Jones Act for a 60-day period, a move it says is intended to blunt an abrupt rise in energy costs tied to recent developments in the Middle East.

Context of recent strikes and stated objective

The waiver follows joint strikes carried out by the United States and Israel against Iran nearly three weeks earlier. Officials framed those actions as part of an effort to stop Iran’s progress on nuclear capabilities, and the Administration linked the military activity to a subsequent surge in energy prices.

What the Jones Act requires

The Jones Act governs domestic shipping between U.S. ports. Under the statute, cargo moved between American ports must be transported on vessels that are built in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, registered under the U.S. flag, and crewed predominantly by U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents.

Administration rationale and official statement

Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on social media that President Trump places the American public first and that the temporary waiver is designed to keep oil and other energy supplies moving to communities across the country during disruptions. Wright added that the measure should help ease short-term upward pressure on oil prices as the Administration works to lower costs.

Recent market moves and official data

The Administration’s concern about price spikes is supported by Energy Information Administration figures released earlier in the week. The national average retail price for diesel reached $5.071 per gallon in the most recent week of reporting.

At the same time, the U.S. benchmark for crude, West Texas Intermediate, climbed by roughly $25 to $35 per barrel — an increase of about 30% to 50% — to trading levels between roughly $90 and more than $100 per barrel over the approximately three-week period since the Iran-related hostilities began.

White House intent to ease supply constraints

According to reporting from CNBC, the Administration told the network the waiver is meant to stabilize oil markets while the Iran conflict continues. Officials said the action will permit vital commodities — including oil, natural gas, fertilizer, and coal — to move freely to U.S. ports for the 60-day duration, and that the Administration remains committed to strengthening critical supply chains.

Maritime unions issue strong opposition

A broad coalition of U.S.-based maritime labor unions responded with a joint statement condemning the waiver. The coalition included the following organizations:

• American Maritime Officers
• American Radio Association
• International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots
• Marine Firemen’s Union
• Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association
• Maritime Trades Department, AFL-CIO
• Sailors’ Union of the Pacific
• Seafarers International Union
• Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Unions' national security and economic concerns

The unions argued the sweeping waiver undercuts national security, harms military readiness and shifts important maritime work to foreign operators. Their statement said Jones Act waivers are supposed to meet a strict legal standard and historically have been granted only for narrow, clearly defined national security emergencies when U.S.-flag capacity is demonstrably unavailable.

Economic critique from maritime labor

Maritime labor leaders said the waiver will do little to lower pump prices, noting that gasoline costs are driven primarily by the global crude market. They cited multiple analyses indicating domestic coastal shipping contributes less than one cent per gallon to retail fuel prices and warned that any small savings are unlikely to reach consumers and instead would benefit foreign shipping interests while displacing American maritime jobs.

Call for reversal and alternative solutions

The unions urged the Administration to rescind the waiver and to collaborate with affected parties on measures to tackle energy costs that do not compromise American employment, national security, or the long-term health of the U.S. maritime industrial base.

Expert view on practical barriers to the waiver

Jock O’Connell, an economist at the Pacific Maritime Shipping Association, described significant logistical and regulatory hurdles that could limit the waiver’s short-term effectiveness. He noted that finding or redeploying suitable vessels and hiring crews would be difficult within the 60-day window.

Specific operational and regulatory obstacles

O’Connell highlighted several practical impediments:

• Owners would need to identify or reassign ships from existing services.
• Crew hiring and deployment would be required for any non-U.S.-flagged vessels to operate on U.S. trades.
• The U.S. Coast Guard would likely inspect vessels and certify officers before they could carry cargo to U.S. ports.
• Environmental regulations may rule out the use of many older vessels and barges.

Potential timeline mismatch

O’Connell cautioned that by the time foreign owners and operators completed required inspections, certifications and compliance steps, the 60-day waiver period could already have expired, limiting any intended short-term relief.

February import totals and annual decline

Containerized freight destined for the United States declined again in February, S&P Global Market Intelligence reported. Imports reached 2.19 million TEU (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units) in February, a 5.3% drop from the same month a year earlier and the sixth straight month of annual declines.

Monthly TEU sequence since July

The decline continues a multi-month slide that included the following monthly import totals:

• July: 3.01 million TEU (first month above 3 million TEU)
• August: 2.90 million TEU
• September: 2.72 million TEU
• October: 2.71 million TEU
• November: 2.63 million TEU
• December: 2.32 million TEU
• January: 2.42 million TEU (down 5.4% annually)
• February: 2.19 million TEU (down 5.3% annually)

S&P Global Market Intelligence noted July's higher volume followed a June decline and coincided with importers adjusting sourcing after the White House imposed reciprocal tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which took effect on August 7.

Year-to-date comparison through February

On a year-to-date basis through February, total U.S.-bound imports amounted to 4.87 million TEU, a 5.4% decrease compared with the same period a year earlier.

Tariff rulings and immediate policy actions

The firm said tariff-related uncertainty influenced February results. A recent Supreme Court decision found the legality of the White House's IEEPA tariffs lacking, and that development was followed by the imposition of 10% Section 122 tariffs for 150 days. Those legal and policy shifts factored into import patterns in February.

Two-tiered import behavior across sectors

S&P Global Market Intelligence described the month's activity as two-fold: industrial-focused imports fell sharply while consumer-focused shipments showed signs of recovery. The firm highlighted a sequential January-to-February rise of 5.4% in seasonal discretionary items such as electronics and leisure goods, which it said may reflect concerns about higher future tariffs dating back to the third quarter of 2025.

Detailed sector breakdown

Industry-specific movements in February included pronounced declines in capital and material imports and mixed results elsewhere:

• Capital goods: down 28.6%
• Materials: down 16.9%
• Auto-based imports: up 6.6%
• Consumer staples (food and personal care): down 11.4%
• Consumer discretionary (apparel, appliances, electronics): up 6.1%

Analysis and comments from S&P Global Market Intelligence

Chris Rogers, Head of Research at S&P Global Market Intelligence, told LM that February's results were stronger than the team originally forecast. Their initial projection expected a decline in the low double-digits, but the actual 5.3% drop signaled unexpected consumer-side resilience.

Rogers attributed some of the outperformance to autos and auto parts, where tariffs have been in place long enough for supply chains to stabilize. He said capital goods and materials reflected a "tariff hangover" effect more in line with expectations. He also noted February benefitted from timing effects around a later-than-normal Lunar New Year, which shifted some shipments into the month, and observed that tariffs implemented during February did not affect shipping decisions made in December and January.

Near-term outlook, tariff effects and regional shifts

With the 10% Section 122 tariffs in effect, S&P Global Market Intelligence expects March might perform better than February. Rogers explained that some importers shipping from China and the ASEAN region will temporarily face a 10% tariff rather than the previous 18%–20%, encouraging renewed front-loading of inventories ahead of future tariff changes.

Regional trade patterns in February showed a continued surge from ASEAN, with imports from that bloc up 21.8% year over year, while imports from mainland China fell 12.4% year over year.